He then invested time going through why Google does not rank them well – and it might be greatly around author bylines.Matt referenced this story on the Press Gazette named The Sun and Mail Online think they arent getting reasonable share of Google search traffic. We know that Google mentions these aspects as significant in how sites rank in search, so these data are unbiased reasons why other one publisher may fare much better in search than another. Matt cites the search quality raters guidelines:8/ @Google may not be as effective in this regard as publishers would like (See the Suns concerns in the post in 1/), however one outcome is most likely to be that websites that rely heavily on news firm content will see their search efficiency suffer.– Matt Rogerson (@MattRogerson) November 8, 2021 Here is what he came up with:12/ On the “Covid” search term, almost 60% of material is credited to a firm, with simply over 3% by a called byline.https:// t.co/ HUC90vrC5e pic.twitter.com/8UZNDx1UNt— Matt Rogerson (@MattRogerson) November 8, 2021 14/ In our paper to @Ofcom, I noted locations where the DM stands out in search, “Kim Kardashian” being a case in point.

Matt Rogerson, the Director of public law at Guardian Media Group, posted a Twitter thread dissecting why he believes the claims from The Sun and Mail Online about Google Search mistreating them, are false. He then invested time going through why Google does not rank them well – and it might be greatly around author bylines.Matt referenced this story on the Press Gazette named The Sun and Mail Online believe they arent getting reasonable share of Google search traffic. Matt then referrals at least two reasons that The Sun and Mail Online do not rank too in Google Search by The Guardian and other publications. Those reasons are:-LRB- 1) Speed concerns
( 2) Issues with original, thorough, and investigative reportingThe speed problems are simple and I personally question it is the main reason any wire service would not see great rankings in Google Search. However here is his tweet on that:6/ I ran them again in Sept 21 adding the @Telegraph. Green is good, red is bad. We understand that Google cites these aspects as considerable in how websites rank in search, so these information are unbiased reasons that other one publisher may fare better in search than another. pic.twitter.com/a6dRshYuh5— Matt Rogerson (@MattRogerson) November 8, 2021 It is the initial, in-depth, and investigative reporting issues that I found most revealing. Simply put, it seems like most of the newspaper article The Daily Mail posts are without called authors, called bylines. Matt points out the search quality raters standards:8/ @Google might not be as successful in this regard as publishers would like (See the Suns concerns in the post in 1/), however one outcome is likely to be that sites that rely greatly on news agency material will see their search performance suffer.– Matt Rogerson (@MattRogerson) November 8, 2021 Then he digs into categories of stories and who wrote those stories. Here is how he did it:10/ Ive identified the data where there was a named byline, generic (i.e. DM reporter), Agency copy (eg. Reuters, AFP), and Unknown (Total short articles minus articles where no author info is offered).– Matt Rogerson (@MattRogerson) November 8, 2021 Here is what he developed:12/ On the “Covid” search term, nearly 60% of content is credited to a company, with simply over 3% by a called byline.https:// t.co/ HUC90vrC5e pic.twitter.com/8UZNDx1UNt— Matt Rogerson (@MattRogerson) November 8, 2021 14/ In our paper to @Ofcom, I noted areas where the DM stands out in search, “Kim Kardashian” being a case in point. Company copy represent just 3% here, with generic or called bylines making up 20%. A huge distinction to those very first 3 terms.https:// t.co/ Xpugc4LjuU pic.twitter.com/PI5IgWXmjN— Matt Rogerson (@MattRogerson) November 8, 2021 15/ If DMs own search function is correct, + considering a % of authors arent categorised, the data suggests that of the c4.8 million short articles in the DM archive, more than 50% come straight from news agencies. pic.twitter.com/EvNndKIsSE— Matt Rogerson (@MattRogerson) November 8, 2021 Look at how little the “named byline” slice of the pie is. I am not exactly sure how it compares to The Guardian or other publications but truthfully, I am stunned to see this number to be so low.His conclusion:17/ … Objective information recommends that elements other than subjectivity may play in part in how @Google ranks the DM compared to other publishers. However I d love thoughts from more learned professionals than me. I dont declare to be an expert!!– Matt Rogerson (@MattRogerson) November 8, 2021 What do you all think? Is this the power of bylines or just that this is one signal that the material was not “initial, extensive, and investigative reporting.”Forum discussion at Twitter.

site-tuning